7 ms·

I've been drinking Arizona tea since the 90s. Something they aren't saying they do, but I'm certain they are, is watering down the product. It's the beverage

I've been drinking Arizona tea since the 90s. Something they aren't saying they do, but I'm certain they are, is watering down the product. It's the beverage equivalent of shrinkflation. Their green tea in particular lacks flavor. I kind of wish they would bite the bullet and make a can $1.99 and bring back the full flavor 90s version.

flatiron 5y ago
In high school in the 90s I worked at a place that hired lifeguards and then staffed things like condo and hotel pools etc so they didn’t have to. Sometimes we would get stuff like birthday parties and such. I was a lifeguard at a party for the ceo of Arizona iced tea. Never seen a house like that. Crazy how much money you can make selling sugar and water. From that experience they aren’t lacking.
- gigaflop 5y ago
  Add enough sugar to a flavored drink, and some American[0] is going to say they love it. Make it cheap, and they'll keep coming back for it. [0]No ill will, just an observation and generalization.
- cnasc 5y ago
  I’m pretty sure we grew up in the same town
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
I find this very difficult to believe. The actual tea that is in an Arizona iced tea I'm guessing maybe costs ~5c or so, if that? Surely the packaging, water, sugar, transportation and storage costs are the vast, vast majority of the cost.
- bombcar 5y ago
  Once you realize that Arizona Ice Tea is basically just a taller can with water in it when compared to a can of pop, it makes more sense how it can still be $.99. The main additional costs are a bit more aluminum and some more water, everything else is comparable. And the 99 cents is really tied to their brand; if they break it they get hurt more, so they'll push it as long as they "can" - likely introducing a smaller or larger can at some point.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    > And the 99 cents is really tied to their brand; if they break it they get hurt more, so they'll push it as long as they "can" - likely introducing a smaller or larger can at some point. Coca-Cola had a very similar issue way, way back in the day. I think they were pegged at 5 cents a bottle? That left them in the even more awkward position of being unable to raise the price without instantly doubling it.
    - bombcar 5y ago
      Yeah, pricing is always inflexible near noticeable points, and I suspect a decent amount of the inflation we're seeing is those points breaking down, so prices surge past to a higher bar.
    - Spooky23 5y ago
      And… in 2 liter units Coke was still 5 cents for 8 ounces a few years ago. Soda margins are nuts and solely driven by demand. Their most profitable unit is the 20oz bottle that was $1 in 1999 and $2+ today.
      - conductr 5y ago
        Because they know it’s a convenience sized item. People wouldn’t pay that amount in a grocery store. But soda prices have gone up a lot just since 2020. I find a 12 pack of cans is and 2L is usually the most economical units and they’ve basically doubled for me.
        Spooky23 5y ago
        Agreed. Good thing for me, I have a diet Dr Pepper habit and paying beer prices for a can of soda increased my water consumption!
        conductr 5y ago
        Right there with you, my DDP intake is flat out embarrassing but I've not really switched other than buying in bulk from the value chains and massively stocking up when I see a "good" deal.
- mywittyname 5y ago
  You find it hard to believe that a company would cut cost by reducing the amount of product they use? Tea, even if it is cheap, is still much more expensive than corn syrup and water. So if you want to cut costs, it makes sense to reduce the amount of tea and make up for it with more sugar. If you do it a little bit over 30 year years, few people with notice. You get a panel of taste testers compare the current version with a slightly watered down version and see if they can tell the difference. If most can't, you make the change and pocket the savings as profit. It's like making a copy of a copy on a copy machine, you can't tell much difference between the two, but repeating the process over multiple generations and the small differences adds up to be dramatic between the original and the 30th generation version. This exact situation happens for many food companies. They gradually reduce quality and costs over the years. And once the people who remembered the original product die off or forget, it can be hard to re-establish yourself as anything but a cheap brand. Five cents is a big cut of a $0.50 product.
  - hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
    > You find it hard to believe that a company would cut cost by reducing the amount of product they use? No, my point is that if you want to cut costs, why would you focus on the cheapest (perhaps not in the overall sense, but in the total value of the product) ingredient that actually gives you the most "bang for the buck". I would imagine that slight packaging changes could provide much more savings without changing the taste of what actually goes in your mouth.
    - wyre 5y ago
      At 99 cents i would imagine packaging and distribution is as efficient as it can be. Making the recipe cheaper would be the only way to cut costs.
    - JamesSwift 5y ago
      Because its the easiest knob to turn by far to adjust costs? What is harder, to tell the machines to mix 5% more water in, or to modify packaging in ways that affect all upstream and downstream processes?
zardo 5y ago
Taste sensitivity tends to decrease with age. It could be the exact same beverage, and taste different to you because you're 30 years older.
- rhino369 5y ago
  They might also have found that people just want sugar water. A lot of mass market food products get bastardized by being made blander and more sugary.
  - brimble 5y ago
    Noodles & Company did the restaurant version of this a few years (... 5ish? 6?) ago. Went from a sensible serving of good and healthy-ish (for a "fast casual" chain restaurant) food for a surprisingly reasonable price, to a heaping mountain of bad food at roughly the same price. I assume some MBA ran some numbers and decided ruining it would make more money.
nonamenoslogan 5y ago
I miss the cobalt-blue bottle of ginseng green tea they used to have for $1.19.

flatiron 5y ago

In high school in the 90s I worked at a place that hired lifeguards and then staffed things like condo and hotel pools etc so they didn’t have to. Sometimes we would get stuff like birthday parties and such. I was a lifeguard at a party for the ceo of Arizona iced tea. Never seen a house like that. Crazy how much money you can make selling sugar and water. From that experience they aren’t lacking.

gigaflop 5y ago
Add enough sugar to a flavored drink, and some American[0] is going to say they love it. Make it cheap, and they'll keep coming back for it. [0]No ill will, just an observation and generalization.
cnasc 5y ago
I’m pretty sure we grew up in the same town

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

I find this very difficult to believe. The actual tea that is in an Arizona iced tea I'm guessing maybe costs ~5c or so, if that? Surely the packaging, water, sugar, transportation and storage costs are the vast, vast majority of the cost.

bombcar 5y ago
Once you realize that Arizona Ice Tea is basically just a taller can with water in it when compared to a can of pop, it makes more sense how it can still be $.99. The main additional costs are a bit more aluminum and some more water, everything else is comparable. And the 99 cents is really tied to their brand; if they break it they get hurt more, so they'll push it as long as they "can" - likely introducing a smaller or larger can at some point.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  > And the 99 cents is really tied to their brand; if they break it they get hurt more, so they'll push it as long as they "can" - likely introducing a smaller or larger can at some point. Coca-Cola had a very similar issue way, way back in the day. I think they were pegged at 5 cents a bottle? That left them in the even more awkward position of being unable to raise the price without instantly doubling it.
  - bombcar 5y ago
    Yeah, pricing is always inflexible near noticeable points, and I suspect a decent amount of the inflation we're seeing is those points breaking down, so prices surge past to a higher bar.
  - Spooky23 5y ago
    And… in 2 liter units Coke was still 5 cents for 8 ounces a few years ago. Soda margins are nuts and solely driven by demand. Their most profitable unit is the 20oz bottle that was $1 in 1999 and $2+ today.
    - conductr 5y ago
      Because they know it’s a convenience sized item. People wouldn’t pay that amount in a grocery store. But soda prices have gone up a lot just since 2020. I find a 12 pack of cans is and 2L is usually the most economical units and they’ve basically doubled for me.
      - Spooky23 5y ago
        Agreed. Good thing for me, I have a diet Dr Pepper habit and paying beer prices for a can of soda increased my water consumption!
        conductr 5y ago
        Right there with you, my DDP intake is flat out embarrassing but I've not really switched other than buying in bulk from the value chains and massively stocking up when I see a "good" deal.
mywittyname 5y ago
You find it hard to believe that a company would cut cost by reducing the amount of product they use? Tea, even if it is cheap, is still much more expensive than corn syrup and water. So if you want to cut costs, it makes sense to reduce the amount of tea and make up for it with more sugar. If you do it a little bit over 30 year years, few people with notice. You get a panel of taste testers compare the current version with a slightly watered down version and see if they can tell the difference. If most can't, you make the change and pocket the savings as profit. It's like making a copy of a copy on a copy machine, you can't tell much difference between the two, but repeating the process over multiple generations and the small differences adds up to be dramatic between the original and the 30th generation version. This exact situation happens for many food companies. They gradually reduce quality and costs over the years. And once the people who remembered the original product die off or forget, it can be hard to re-establish yourself as anything but a cheap brand. Five cents is a big cut of a $0.50 product.
- hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
  > You find it hard to believe that a company would cut cost by reducing the amount of product they use? No, my point is that if you want to cut costs, why would you focus on the cheapest (perhaps not in the overall sense, but in the total value of the product) ingredient that actually gives you the most "bang for the buck". I would imagine that slight packaging changes could provide much more savings without changing the taste of what actually goes in your mouth.
  - wyre 5y ago
    At 99 cents i would imagine packaging and distribution is as efficient as it can be. Making the recipe cheaper would be the only way to cut costs.
  - JamesSwift 5y ago
    Because its the easiest knob to turn by far to adjust costs? What is harder, to tell the machines to mix 5% more water in, or to modify packaging in ways that affect all upstream and downstream processes?

zardo 5y ago

Taste sensitivity tends to decrease with age. It could be the exact same beverage, and taste different to you because you're 30 years older.

rhino369 5y ago
They might also have found that people just want sugar water. A lot of mass market food products get bastardized by being made blander and more sugary.
- brimble 5y ago
  Noodles & Company did the restaurant version of this a few years (... 5ish? 6?) ago. Went from a sensible serving of good and healthy-ish (for a "fast casual" chain restaurant) food for a surprisingly reasonable price, to a heaping mountain of bad food at roughly the same price. I assume some MBA ran some numbers and decided ruining it would make more money.

nonamenoslogan 5y ago

I miss the cobalt-blue bottle of ginseng green tea they used to have for $1.19.